Category talk:Stubs
Our stub articles need more thought put into them. Often an article is made a stub when somebody can't finish an article. they should be completed so that the template can be removed however this doesn't seem to happen. here are the reasons I can think of. *It gets completed but noone removes the stub template. *It gets completed but is really short so the hope is someone else will add a bit more to it. *someone has added a section but noone has the information to fill it out. at 90 pages it's difficult to start working on. We need a process so that we can start reducing the number of stubs that we have.--Drawde83 19:50, February 16, 2010 (UTC) :Well, the first thing I notice looking at the list of Stubs are the Year pages, which I believe were actually started by you Drawde. Initially I wasn't really interested in these pages because I thought they were pointless since we had the Timeline, but I've been thinking we need to change how this works. I'd either like to make these year Pages more prominent, or drastically cut down the Timeline page, which I feel has frankly become too long and irrelevant. :The next thing I notice is that a lot of them aren't actually stubs, like the FOXALIVE page as an example. I'm actually going to remove that one right now. :I'm going to start going through the pages at some point and be really harsh in how stubs are placed. Some pages have stubs, but there's no way we'll be able to expand the pages than we already have, so the stub moniker becomes pointless, because no more info can physically be added (the John Turner page as a random example) without just fluffing the page pointlessly. --Fantomas 20:06, February 16, 2010 (UTC) ::I'm pretty sure they were started by me. So what was the point you were trying to make?? I was thinking we could implement something like Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Assessment. Removing the stub template isn't going to get these pages edited. It would be better if there was more discussion around these articles. --Drawde83 01:47, February 17, 2010 (UTC) :::Yeah, sorry, my point there was actually kind of irrelevant to this discussion. I basically think the Timeline is too long now, and we should either think about trimming it down, or focus on fleshing the year pages out in order to replace the timeline. :::My only remarks regarding removings stubs is in regards to pages that can't physically be expanded. Like the John Turner article I presented as an example. There's nothing we can add there as far as I can see because no other information exists about him, so marking the page as a Stub is pointless because nothing can be added. The page is, for lack of a better word, "complete". I'm going to go through and see if there are any more pages like this. --Fantomas 02:29, February 17, 2010 (UTC) new stub suggestions Context These categories show why an article is a stub and how it can be improved *new game stub - topic that could rapidly be turned into an article. *released game stub - topics related to a released game so no new information is expected to come out. *multiple game stub - topics that apply to multiple games. *misc stub - topics that are not tied to a particular game. Status These categories show what stage the article is at towards becoming an article. *new stub - stub article where new information is expected to be added. *stalled stub - stub article that is not being expanded. *complete stub - stub articles that cannot be expanded further. If each stub was assigned a context and a status category it would make it easier to know how to improve it. --Drawde83 05:53, April 9, 2010 (UTC)